Opinion 23-139

December 14, 2023

Digest:  Where a full-time judge’s former law firm advises the judge that a former client recently posted an online review of the judge’s legal services, the judge must request that the law firm remove the judge’s name from such review but need not take any further action.

Rules: 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.2(C); 100.4(G); Opinions 23-25; 20-158; 15-19. 

Opinion:

          The inquiring judge ceased practicing law on assuming full-time judicial office a few years ago.  The judge’s former law firm nonetheless recently received a positive online review from one of the judge’s former clients, which includes the judge’s full name.  The review does not mention the judge’s current judicial status or the date of the representation, which took place several years earlier.  The law firm has asked the judge for direction on what to do with this publicly posted review.  The judge, in turn, requests our guidance.  

          A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and must always act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]).  A full-time judge may not practice law (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[G]). Moreover, a judge must not lend the prestige of judicial office to advance any private interests (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[C]).

          Here, the posted review could potentially create the improper appearance that the judge is practicing law and/or lending judicial prestige to advance the law firm’s private interests.   For example, in Opinion 15-19, a judge was concerned that their former law firm was still using the judge’s name in some of its printed materials including the firm’s letterhead.  We found it was sufficient for the judge to send a letter to their former law firm requesting them to “immediately cease and desist” using the judge’s name and asking them to “immediately remove my name” from the law firm’s signage, letterhead, and other materials (id.).

          We conclude that the inquiring judge should contact their former law firm and request that the firm immediately remove the judge’s name from the online review.  Once the judge has made that request, the judge need not take any further action (see e.g. Opinions 23-25; 20-158; 15-19).